Quote:
Originally Posted by joho  thats why i said more so in the past 
but still a individual leader should not be underestimated even now they just play a different game ie economic dominance they still try to control the populace ie papers internet ect
its still the same type that rises to the top just the rules of the game have changed
and you can still credit most leaders with the big decisions by who they appoint to other posts and who they post and so on
ie the good decision maker appoints someone who appoints some good expert then the expert gives feedback that reaches the leader good decision a positive self feed back loop
bad derision maker appoints the wrong person who picks the wrong expert negative self feedback loop
could one rise that eventually controlled the world? never say never
but according to the rules it would break back up eventually
(would have quoted but for some reason if i quote then a moderator has to view it first happened with my first post to and not up yet) |
I would say that most so called world leaders today just respond to events as they happen and very few of them create events that others must respond to. And most of those people that create events that must be responded to, are just crazy. It has been a long time since I have seen anyone appear on the world stage that both creates events and dose so in a positive manner exhibiting positive leadership.
The more you have to lose, both as an individual and as a country, the less likely you are to rock the boat. If you do not have anything to lose and are willing to rock the boat you are probably so weak and unimportant you can be just dismissed and they will just wait until you implode.
This does not mean that some magnetic leader might arise, only that they are very rare events and because more people in the world have something lose, more so than in any time in human history, most people do not want to rock the boat. So a new Genghis Khan is unlikely though not impossible.
